Page images

maxims of law. Now, in that case I mentioned much less should I take notice of that sort of at Guildford, I suffered words to go as proved, slander which, affecting to point itself, oply wbich I could have disproved—and there are disgraced itself in the manner of that affecta. gentlemen in court now who know the fact, tion. For my own part, I should think I was and would bave been the evidences-1 suffered stooping exceediogly below that character and words to go as proved, because I would not that situation in the world wbich I hope I am give the prosecutor a right to reply. Your entitled to, if I were to set myself to defend my Iordship directed the jury to find a verdict for own peculiar part from any aspersions that have the words; and your lordship said, if your di- been thrown upon me. It is the duty of my rection was mistaken (because my counsel bad office to prosecute with integrity those whom, argued that the words were not actionable) your according to the best of my judgınent, I believe lordship told my counsel-(he published a to be fair objects of prosecution. It is the duty pamphlet afterwards :- he was much hurt at of my office, as far as I can govern that duty, it), you said that what be had advanced sur- to conduct the prosecution with the utmost prized you; that it was new law ; such as you clearness and the fullest honour. And if I have had never heard before-(he was much hurt at taken a part in this, or in any prosecution that it; he felt it: he was hurt at your lordsbip's any man can fairly stand forth, in a manly style, declaration : he published a pamphlet after and challenge directly and pointedly, let ii be wards addressed to your lordsbip, which I am challenged, and let me be called upon to answer sure you must remember).-My lord, in con- it. But to be told that I stand here ready to sequence of your lordship’s direction, a verdict take all manner of advantages, fair or unfair, was given against me for 4001 ; and you said, against the delinquents whom I call into jusif you were mistaken in your directions, that I | tice, it is a sort of aspersion below refutation; had a remedy; I need only appeal to the court: and I will not stoop to take notice of it, uoless I had a remedy. What sort of a remedy? The it should condescend upon some particular act expence of the remedy was almost equal to the in my conduct that makes me an object of that verdict. The verdict was set aside, that is species of animadversion. Whether I am or true; but your lordship knows that a verdict whether I am not to reply in such a cause makes the defendant pay his owu costs. I as this, it is, in this moment of it, not so should bare had the custs, if the verdict had much irregular to advance it, as impossible to pot been given against me. What sort of re- foresee. When I read over the case, when I medies are these, that are worse than the fair consider the effect of it, I cannot firetel the honest punishment that can be inflicted upon slightest occasion to trouble you by way of tbe charge? Therefore I do intreat that your reply : for of all the plain and simple matters Jordsbip will not send me to remedies which I that ever I hall occasion to lay before a court hardly know bow to take; especially as I have of justice, there is the least degree of complialways found that such kind of remedies from cation in that which I am about to state to you your lordship are like giving a man a wound, and then telling him where he may find a This is an information brought against Mr. plaister: it is not a thing that I should wish to Horne for being the author and the original do, nor would your lordship like to suffer it. publisher of this libel. The crime that I put And as your lordship says that no law has been inost upon is that which I stated last, that he quoted to prevent his reply, I intreat that I was the original publisher of this libel. It is may beær from Mr. Attorney-General, or from in that respect that bis crime appears to me to yourself, tbat law that gives him a right to differ most from those that have been called reply.

into justice before. The circumstance of bis Lord Mansfield (to the Attorney-General). name being printed at the bottom of the libel Go on with the trial.

was an additional aggravation in this respect, Mr. Horne. I shall hear no reason then because it seemed to imply a bolder insult upon from either of you? Well! if so, I must sub- manners and decency, and the laws of the wit under it.

country, than a simple publication of a libel

without that name would have been. It seemed Attorney General. My Jord, and gentle to imply this, because, while that name lay bid men of the jury, there is nothing in this case behind the printer of the paper, the stoutest (unless the behaviour of the defeudant should champion for sedition could not have defied the constitute tbat something) that can make it at laws with greater security; for, though it stood all different from the most ordinary case of a in capitals upon the front of many thousand plain delinquent in a most gross offence being pages, yet it was as inscrutable and impossible brought before a court of justice. I have looked for me to follow, as if the name had not apround with a degree of examination to see if Ipeared upon the paper at all. For the rest of could see whether there was one amongst the it, I put it upon the publication, chiefly benumerous bystanders that I saw here, who bad cause that seems to be the whole object and conceived a favourable impression from so ex- drift of the composer of the libel: for as a traordinary an interposition as one has heard composition it is absolutely nothing. I do not to-day. I certainly should not rise to take off mean to speak of it by way of derogation from or repel loose slander scattered about without the parts and talents of the ingenious gentlebeing pointed at any one individual particularly, man (whose parts and talents I never heard so


much of as I have done to-day) I do not mean wbere an orderly government prevails, and to speak it in derogation of them; no doubt but while tbe form of government subsists, to write he could have writ a better thing: but bis un- against the transactions of that government, as derstanding was industriously let down and sup- if stained with all the crimes under heaven, and pressed; and the very purpose of this writing calculated for no earthly purpose but of comwas to make it ribaldry and trash. For the mitting those crimes ? To suppress liberty (the intention of it was (as it appears to me) the in- only object for which government is or ought tention of it was nothing more than to defy the to be erected) to suppress that liberty by the laws and justice of the country, proclaiming, means of murder, is imputed to the transactions as it were, thus: either punish this libel, or of the government of ihe freest country now confess that there are no laws in the country under heaven! and it is called liberty to do by which a libel can be punished. Others bave that! wbereas men must be short-sighted inentertained sufficient malice against this coun- deed, a man must be drivelling like an idiot try; others have been anxious enough to ex.

that does not see that the maintaining of regucite sedition; but this is written chiefly with lar government is the true, the only means of the purpose of telling maukind—“Thus I dare maintaining liberty. Is it liberty to put the do!'I dare insult the laws without having any characters of persons, the properties of every earthly thing to state to the public, except an individual, under the tyrannous hand of anarinsult upon the laws.” Sometimes a libel is chy, and of every man that thinks proper to covered (though thinly covered cvough) with seize them, uncontroled by law ? Is that lj. the pretence of informing mankind, or of dis. berty? And is there any one by-stander of cussing public subjects for the use of mankind : the most ordinary understanding that hears me here is not even the affectation of giving infor- now speak, that has so gross an understanding mation : bere is not even the affectation of dis. as to imagine that he would be more free if it cussion : but the writer tells you in so many were in the power of any man that thought blunt worils (of no kind of meaning in the proper to revile his character, (which is the world but to convey reproach and scandal) question which is now immediately subthat the persons who were employed by thé jected to you) or to injure him in his person or government are guilty of murder; and the fortune, or in any other mander whatever ? persous who employed them consequently in. This therefore is not to be coloured, as far as volved in the same guilt. For what is the na. I can foresee, by any kind of argument what. ture of the libel that is published— King's ever. The vature of the libel is tuo gross to be Arms tavern - At a meeting held during an commented upon; it does no honour to any adjournment” (I do not mean to make any body that has been concerned in making it. observation upon the meeting during an ad- I shall content myself with proving the fact journment)— a gentleman proposed that a of this paper baving been written, of ibis paper subscription should be entered into"-(this I having been published originally by Mr. conceive to be a device-not a very rich one in Horne; and the conclusion to be made upon point of invention—but a device to introduce that is too obvious a one, and too broad a one, ihat which follows) " a gentleman proposed for me to foresee at least any kind of difficulty that a subscription should be entered into by about it. It was my duty to lay it before you. such of the members present who might ap. 1, charged with the duty of any office, have prove of the same, for the purpose of raising brought it here; it is your duty io judge of it. ibe sum of 1001. to be applied in the relief of You, charged by the oath that you have taken, the widows, orphaps, and aged parents of our are to determine upon it. If you can be of beloved American fellow-subjecis, who, faith- opinion that this licentiousness is fit to be tole. ful to the character of Englishmen, preferring rated, according to the old and established laws death 10 slasery, were for that reason only in- of this country; if you are of opinion that the humanly murdered by the king's troops." fact is not proved upon the defendant in the Murdered by the king's troops! What kind of manner in which it is stated by the witnesses; palliation (justification it is absurd and non. it will be your duty, your oaths will bind you sepse to talk of) but what kind of palliation to acquit him: but if the fact should be proved, can be given to the charging men with the if it should stand as clear as to my judgment crime of murder, by writing against them in a and apprehension it now stands, you will be news-paper ? Is it to be laid down for law, constrained by the same necessity of duty, and or a thing to be tolerated in a civilized coun- by the additional sanction of an oath, to enter. try, that criines of the most heinous sort shall tain exactly the opinion of it which I have be imputell to men by a public reviler in a found myself constrained to entertain. I have Dew's-paper, who yet dares 'not stand forth as no wish (I did not know Mr. Horne) I have no an accuser? Is that to be tolerated in a civilized wish to prosecute any one individual; nor bave country,—the writing against men that they are I been desired, if I had such a wish, to prosecute guilty of murder who are not to be accused of him. Aud I hope I may add, that no desire that crime? Is it to be tolerated in a country could have compelled me to prosecute a man

whom I myself" had not thought guilty, potSume account of this business is exhibited withstanding any thing that has been said on in Stephens's Memoirs of Horne Tovke, vol. 1, the contrary side. I go upon the evidence as Pp. 435, et seg.

it is in my possession ; I go upon the evidence as it is in my power to produce it. If there be | June the 9th, and of July 14, 1775. The witany evidence on the other side, and if that is ness inspects newspapers.) sufficient to refute the imputation which the Are those papers published by you ? --- I print evidence that I bave to produce lays upon bim, that paper, and I suppose they are. I sball be as ready to exainine that with exactly

Cross-examined by the Defendant. the same degree of candour, and, I hope, of uprightness, as I have done the present. My Mr. Horne. I am very glad to see you, Mr. duly is done by laying the matter before you. Woodfall. I desire to ask you some questions. Your duty, I am sure, will be done to your Pray what was your motive for inserting that own honour and the support of public justice advertisement ?---Your desire. by the verdict you will give upon the occasion. Had you no other motive?.--) was paid for

it, as the advertisement is paid for. EVIDENCE FOR THE PROSECUTION.

Pray was it by accident, or by my desire,

that there should be witnesses to see me write Thomas Wilson sworn.

that advertisement ?---By your desire. Examined by Mr. Solicitor General.* And did I, or did I not, formally, before that

witness, when called in, deliver that paper as Sol. Gen. Look at those papers. (The se

my act and deed, as if it had been a bond ?-veral Manuscripts from which the advertise

Yes, ments were printed in the newspapers. The

It is true, I did. Did I not always direct -witness inspects them.)

you, if called upon, to furnish the fullest proof Do you know whose hand-writing those ihat you could give ?---You did, Sir. papers are ?—They look like Mr. Horne's Now then, Sir, if you please, say whether I hand-writing

have ever written any thing in your newsDo you Řnow Mr. Horne ?-I have seen paper before !--- Yes, frequently. him write.

How many years ago, do you think ?--The Do you take these to be his hand-writing? | first remarkable thing that I remember, was -They are like his band-writing. I will not something about sir Jobo Gibbons, about his upon my oath say that they are his hand-writ- mistaking Easter for a feast or a fast. ing; I believe that they are.

How long ago is that ?--About the year (The manuscripts of the two advertisements 1768, about the election time. read in court.)

That is about pine years ago ?---Yes.

Have I at any time desired you to screen me Henry Sampson Woodfall sworn.

from the laws ?-- No. Examined by Mr. Wallace.

Has not the method of my transactions with What business are you?-A printer. you at all times been, that you should at all Do you print any newspaper ?— Yes. times, for your own sake, if called upon, give What paper?--- The Public Advertiser. me up to justice?-Certainly; that has always

Mr. Wallace. Look at these two papers been your desire. (shewing the witness the manuscripts of the Pray, Sir, were you not once called upon by advertisements. Tbe witness inspects the ma- the House of Commons for something that I nuscripts.)

wrote in your paper ?-Yes, Sir. Have you ever seen these papers before ?.. Do you remember that I did or did not, when Yes.

I took care to furnish such full proof of this When did you see the first of them ?---About advertisement, give you the reason for it?-I the 7th of June 1775, as near as I can recollect. cannot say I recollect the reason.

By what means did you come by the sight I will mention it. Whether was this the of it ?---Mr. Horne, the defendant, gave it me. reason ? That in the last transaction before the

For what purpose ?---To publish in the Pub- House of Commons it was pretended they let lic Advertiser.

me off, because they could not get full eviDid you accordingly publish it ?---1 did. dence. Do you remember whether 1 rehearsed

Had you any other directions from Mr. that or not; and said, that if they now chose Horne?---Yes.' He desired me to send it to to take notice of this advertisement, they should several other papers, which I did.

not want full evidence?-I do recollect that Do you recollect the names of any of them ? | conversation. ---The whole, I believe, of them ; I cannot ex- You remember that was the reason I gave? actly recollect.

I do, Did you follow his directions ?---I did.

Will you please to look at these newspapers ? Was any thing paid for it ?--- Yes. Mr. (shewing several papers of the Public AilverHorne paid the bill.

tiser to the witness. The witness inspects For the publication !--- Yes.

Do you

know these news-papers ?Mr. Wallace. Look at those news-papers

I do. (shewing the witness the Public Advertiser of Do you believe that you published them ?

I do. Alexander Wedderburn, afterwards earl of Look at the dates. I will call them over to Rosslyn, and successively Chief Justice of C. you from a list—May the 30th and the Sist; B. and Lord Chancellor.

Jupe the 6tb, the 9th, the 101b, the 13th, the 15th, and the 16th, 1775?-I have looked at How came you to be an evidence ? I heard the papers: they are all of my publication: the that if I could produce my author, matters date of one of them I cappoi inake out; it is might be better for me; and as you had no June something

sort of objection (which you told me at the We will go on-Jone the 21st and the 27th, time) I did of course produce those copies that 1775; then there is January the 11th, Fe- appeared there to Messrs. Chamberlayne and bruary the 8th, February the 7th, the 11th, White, the solicitors for the treasury. June the 2d, and June the soth, 1777 ?—They Should you at any time, if you had been are likewise of my publishing.

called upon, have declared that I was the auPray, Sir, do you recollect the contents of thor of that advertisement ?- Most certainly ; the paper of May 30, 1775?--No, upon my for you desired it. soul, I do not.

And would have given your evidence?-Yes. You are upon your oath.-I know that in- Whom was the application made by ?- It deed.

was no sort of application at all; I heard of it. Read that part (pointing a part out); read By whom ?-My brother. from “ To provincial congress, April 26, 1774,You never refused to furnish evidence against down to that part (pointing it out).

the author ?-No. Mr. Wallace. The officer should read it; You never were applied to, to do it ?-No; though not now. You will be intitled to read I was not. it, when you come to your


You have said that I never desired you to Mr. Horne. Pray do you know Mr. Arthur conceal me from the law for any thing you Lee?-Yes.

published from me. Did you ever receive any Did you ever receive any account from him letter or message from sir Thomas Mills in relative to the persons who were killed at Lex. your life ?--A private letter I bave. ington and Concord ?-I really do not recollect. But did not that private letter relate to the

Do you recollect that you ever published his public paper ?- Never. name to an account?-1 tbink I did ; relating Did you never receive any message not to to bis agency for some colony.

insert any thing in your paper about lord MansLook at that, and see whether you remember field's earldom ?-- No. that, and how you received it? (Witness in- Upon your oail ?-Upon my oath, to the spects Public Advertiser of May 31, 1775.)— best of my recollection, I never did. Yes. I think I received this from Mr. Arthur From any quarter ?--No. Lee.

Sir, were you ever sent for by lord Bute ? Pray who was Mr. Arthur Lee?-He is of No; I never saw bim. the bar. I have seen him in Westminster- Were you not sent for for inserting a para. ball. He was there at the trial of Mr. Wright graph about the king's marriage ?-No; I am the printer, upon this very affair. I believe he Dot consulted by the higher powers, 1 assure was retained there.

you. Pray was he retained in your cause when If I had thought you were, I never should you were to be prosecuted for this advertise bave trusted you: I do not think you are. ment?-He was.

I am much obliged to you for your good opiAnd why did you retain him? Had you any nion. particular reason ?- presumed he knew more Mr. Horne. I will give you no more trouble. of the subject of the advertisement than I did. Did he ever tell you any thing upon the

William Woodfall sworn. subject ?-We have bad private conversation

Examined by Mr. Wallace. together as a matter of news.

Please to look at that paper (shewing tho Did be ever tell you he had lodged affidavits witoess the manuscript of the advertisement. with the lord mayor of London ?- He did. The witness iospects it). Have you seen that

Sir, did you ever tell me so? I do not re. paper before?- I have. collect.

When did you first see it?-Mr. Horne dePray when bad yon, for the first time, any livered it into my hands in my brother's compte potice of a prosecution for the publishing of ing-house on the 8th of June, to be inserted in this advertisement ?- About two years ago. the Loodon Packet and Morning Chronicle ;

Pray did that prosecutioo go on ?- No. both wbich papers I print.

Do you know why ?-Yes. I let judgment Was it accordingly inserted in those papers? go by default.

It was. The first time?-1 was never called upon Look at those papers (shewing the witness till last January

several papers of the Morning Chronicle and It began two years ago ; and you were never London Packet. The witness inspects them). called forward upon it till last January?-1 Are those papers published by you ?-They think that was about the month.

As vear as you can recollect ?-Yes.
Wbeu were you first applied to, or were you

Cross-examined by the Defendant. ever applied to, to be a witness in this cause? Mr. Horne. Mr. William Woodfall, I will -1 was not.

pot repeat all the same questions to you. Did You never were ?No.

you ever receive any application ? No. VOL, XX,

2 X


Your answer is of the quickest, Had you | small allowances might have been made for not better hear the question ?-1 presume you me by my judge who presides upon this cause, meant to ask the same question you put to my when be considers the peculiar disadvantages brother; as you laid an emphasis upon the word in which stand here before bim. Gentlemen, ‘ you.

I am an absolute novice in these matters; and Did you ever receive any letter, or message, yet opposed to gentlemen some of the mosi emin or desire, or request, of any kind, in any man- nent in their profession, and some of the most ner, pot to insert any thing in your paper rela- conversant in practice. But that is not all; I tive to lord Mausfield's earldom, on your oath? bave a farther disadvantage. I stand bere, -Oo my oath, I never received any letter. gentlemen, before you, a culprit as well as a

Message, or request, of any kind, in any pleader; personally and very materially in.. mavner, Sir, from sir Thomas Mills, I ask terested in the issue of the cause which I bave you ?-No, I think not.

to defend. And every gentleman in the court You must be a little more positive, because must know-(some perhaps by their own ex-, my question will not admit of atbiuk.'- I do perience, all by the reason of the ibing)—how not recollect I did.

very different is the sportful combat with foils Then take a little time.--I don't recollect from that which is seriously disputed with unthat I did. I know very well, that some per. bated swords; and how frequently the fullerson or ober, opce, mentioned it to me. ing of the heart, iu the latter situation, has been

That is an application. To mention it to known to enteeble the steadliest wrist, and to you is a stronger applicat than letter. Jazzle the clearest and most quick-sighted eye. I bad some conversation about it. I don't re- Gentlemen, I have read even of counsel, emi. collect that I was desired not to publish it. nent in their profession, cooversant in practice,

Was it to request you not to insert squibs or approved and applauded for their ingenuity in any thing ?-l recollect I did insert it.

the defence of others, who, when they came to What?-Lord Mansfield's promotion to an stand in the same situation io which I oow earldom,

stand, have complained to the Court (and met What was that application ? That you with an indulgence which I have not), they • would' insert paragraphs about it, or would have complained to the Court of the same disDot'? It was a conversation, not of the nature advantage wbich I now feel. Gentlemen, I of business; nor any express desire to me; bave listened to Mr. Attorney-General's decla. some conversation, as might be between two mation with as much patience, and, I believe, friends.

with much more pleasure, than any one in the Upon your oath, you had never any appli- court. That pleasure I do acknowledge was cation to omit inserting any thing of that kind ? personal to myself; arising from the futility of Upon my oath, I don't recollect that I had. ibe support which Mr. Aitorney-General has

Nor have you ever said that you had ?-?f attempted to give to the serious charge which I don't recollect that I received any application be has brought against me; a pleasure, bowto keep out any thing relative to ii, i conse. ever, mixed with some pain, when I consider quently cannot have spoken of it.

the wretched times at which we are arrived ; Did you, or did you pot, ever speak of it?- when a gentlemau of his natural sagacity is, I Not that I am aware of.

owo, justified by recent experience for sup: But you will not swear positively you never posing it possible to obtain from a London jury did ?-I had no direct application to me to keep a verdict for the crown, upon a mere conmouout any thing

place declamation against scandal and jodeDirect'-My question was direct' or in cency in general, without one single syllable of direct,' or of any kind.- I mean to answer di- reason, or law, or argument, applicable to that rect. I don't recollect that I was ever applied particular charge which he has brought against to, to keep out any thing; or that I ever said I me, and which you are now upon your oaths was applied to, to keep out any thing.

to decide. Gentlemen, you know, as well as More than that you cannot recollect?-No. I do, that I am personally and in all respects

an absolute stranger to every one of [The Associate read the advertisements in


I the several papers that bad been proved and

am glad of it. I do not expect or desire from

you either friendship, or favour, or indulgence, put into court on the part of the prosecution.]

It is your duty to do impartial justice, and I Alt. Gen. My lord, we bave done. oply request your attention. I began with re

questing it; and I requested your attention, Mr. Horne. Gentlemen of the jury; I am that you may be able to judge for yourselves, much happier, gentlemen, in addressing my- and that tbe verdict which you shall give self 10 you, and I hope and believe I shall be personally as it respects myself it is totally inmuch more fortunate as well as happy, than different to me, but that the verdict which in addressing myself to the judge. I have you shall give, may be really your own, as it been betrayed, gentlemen, I hope, into no un- ought to be, and not the judge's. That is the seemly warmth ; but yet into some warmıh. only thing I request of you, and I request it, I bave felt myself like a man first put into hot because it is your duty and your oath. water; but I bave now been long enough in it Gentlemen, as for the charge that is brought to be perfectly cool. And, gentlemen, some agaiust me, you cannot be ignorant that I am

« PreviousContinue »